Palmeiro suspended for steroids

by bison on Aug 1, 2005 12:13 PM CDT Comment 63 comments

Anyone surprised? I guess I am.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-050801palmeiro,1,73886.story?col l=cs-home-headlines

NEW YORK -- Rafael Palmeiro was suspended for violating Major League Baseball's steroids policy Monday, nearly five months after telling Congress that "I have never used steroids. Period."

Palmeiro two weeks ago collected his 3,000th hit, joining Hank Aaron, Willie Mays and Eddie Murray as the only players with 3,000 hits and 500 homers.

Palmeiro, 40, is the seventh and highest-profile player to test positive for steroids under the major league policy adopted earlier this year.

In remarks prepared for a conference call Monday, Palmeiro said he had accepted his punishment and could not explain how the steroids got into his body.

"I have never intentionally used steroids. Never. Ever. Period," he said. "Ultimately, although I never intentionally put a banned substance into my body, the independent arbitrator ruled that I had to be suspended under the terms of the program."

A grievance filed by the players' union against the suspension was denied.

Appearing with Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa and other baseball stars before a congressional committee on March 17, Palmeiro made an opening statement in which he said: "Let me start by telling you this: I have never used steroids. Period. I don't know how to say it any more clearly than that. Never."

Palmeiro seemed in that appearance to be indignant over accusations made by former slugger Jose Canseco, who cited Palmeiro as a steroid user in his tell-all book. In an interview on the CBS television show "60 Minutes," Canseco -- who also testified before Congress -- said he injected the drug into Palmeiro.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

0 recs | Comment 63 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I am too and I am not jumping to conclusions

yet. So many ways to test positive for steroids. Combination of legal supplements can produce an anabolic effect.

"You know what God told the cubs. Don't do anything until I get back!" Pete Rose

by Will71081 on Aug 1, 2005 12:21 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Anyone Bother To Check On How Viagra Tests?

Seriously. Unless anyone here 'fesses up to using Viagra AND then getting yourself tested the way the ballplayers are, how does anyone know? Okay, so I'm half-serious, but anything's possible.

All the 'roid users are chasing records set by Ruth, Maris, Aaron, Cobb, Gehrig, Williams, et al. None of the aforementioned has ever been rumored to have done anything similar in their careers. Heck, if Ruth and Mantle hadn't drank their dinners all the time there's no telling what they could have accomplished, Ruth in particular. All the 'roiders in the world wouldn't be able to catch a relatively sober Babe Ruth.

by BeerCub on Aug 1, 2005 6:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It should

be noted that most of these guys faced inferior competition too.

by socalbob on Aug 1, 2005 10:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Who Did?

Ruth and friends or the 'roid users?

by BeerCub on Aug 1, 2005 10:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Inferior competition"?

I'll see your "inferior competition" and raise you a "talent pool diluted by expansion" and a "talent pool diluted by the ascendance of other sports such as football and basketball".

Luck is the residue of design. -- Branch Rickey

by Gregory on Aug 2, 2005 8:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ruth

and friends never facced a black man, latino, Asian, or any other man of color or race. Just a fact and needs to be considered.

Diluted talent pool? Diluted mind. The game has never been better between the lines. Nice try Greg. That was pretty weak.

by socalbob on Aug 2, 2005 9:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i gotta go with socalbob on this one

despite the disgrace that the devil rays are to the league, the game is still better than ever. stephen jay gould did a pretty interesting article about why we'll never see another .400 hitter. he was basically saying that as the game gets more and more advanced, it eliminates achievements that are too far from the norm.

of course it's much more complicated than that, but he was much smarter than i am.

by billywan on Aug 2, 2005 9:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The quality of the game

has nothing to do with the quality of the talent pool, Bob. That's a matter that has to do with year-round training and a strict fitness regimen, rather than players having to take off-season jobs selling cars and living on a diet of beer, hot dogs, and cigarettes.

Yes, the pre-Robinson era was without blacks and Asians and (mostly) Latinos. But it was also an era in which there were only 16 ML teams, not thirty. It was also an era in which baseball was the only game around. The NFL was born during Ruth's career, but pro football never took off as a high-profile, high-money sport (and thus a viable career move for an athlete as opposed to baseball) until the late fifties. The NBA was born after WWII, and never drew any serious attention until Chamberlain and Russell in the sixties.

And let's not forget that the color line broken by Robinson is in some ways tragically receding today. Baseball is no longer played in the inner city, where basketball is king twelve months out of the year. Young black kids are no longer playing baseball in great numbers in urban areas, a tragedy of monumental proportions to the game that several black ballplayers have discussed at length.

These things tend to even out. Comparisons across chronological lines of the type you initially made are very difficult to assert with any sort of accuracy.

Luck is the residue of design. -- Branch Rickey

by Gregory on Aug 2, 2005 5:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

but he already lied

to congress. He said he has never taken a "performance enhancing drug."

Isn't he is the national spokesperson for Viagara?

:-)

I want to hear what substance he took. I really dislike it when it's reported as Steroids because of the connotation--bending over and sticking a needle in the cheeks. The banned list of substances are all over the board and are taken in many different forms. Just tell us the damn substance!!!!!!

by socalbob on Aug 1, 2005 12:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Sad thing for baseball.

Oh well. I won't judge him and I would never do so.

According to the Chicago Tribune: "The Oakland A's are 32-0 when they have scored more runs than their opponents.

by Carlos on Aug 1, 2005 12:44 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I will Judge

He used a drug that is not only unethetically wrong, but took a drug to enhance his production. He's broken many great hitters who did what Palmeiro did but did it naturally. He's spit on the face of the game of Baseball and made a mockery of it. Then went in front of Congress and point blank lied, under oath. He's a disgrace to the game of Baseball and the Human race. I will judge this fraud.

by SoBlueCal on Aug 1, 2005 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're kidding right?

What does this mean "not only unethically wrong,"

I hope you're kidding otherwise we may have to judge you!

"You know what God told the cubs. Don't do anything until I get back!" Pete Rose

by Will71081 on Aug 1, 2005 1:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Did I mention

an adulterer?? The guy is a scum bag and is a disgrave to Baseball and those of you who are giving him the benefit of the doubt, are either REALLY open minded or REALLLY naive.

C'mon, this isn't the first time his name has been mentioned in the same sentence with steroids and if you've heard his statements about it, he seems indifferent to it.

He's not nearly as indignant as he was when he lied about not taking steroids in front of Congress.

This guy deserves everything that will be coming his way, from here and out. It won't be pretty. He's just lucky that he already reached the 3,000 hit plateau.

by SoBlueCal on Aug 1, 2005 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sounds like youre angry...

because Raffy banged your wife.

by liverj00 on Aug 1, 2005 2:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

speaking of naive

They have known about this for awhile since he has gone through the appeal process. It's not a coincidence that all this didn't come out until after his 3000th hit or the Hall of Fame ceremony.

I think this will keep him out of the Hall of Fame.

by JonH on Aug 1, 2005 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

well...

...he told congress "i have never taken a steroid"
he tested positive for "a banned substance," which clearly could be something other than a steroid.

he says he didn't take anything intentionally. the independent arbitrater accepted that testimony, but said the rules state that he had to be suspended anyway.

i personally have no reason to doubt raffy's word. he says he unkowingly took a banned substance. far be it from me to claim otherwise or call someone out on something i know absolutely nothing about.

by billywan on Aug 1, 2005 1:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't believe the fraud

Look, after all the recent brouhaha over the testing procedures and what substances will be put on the banned list etc etc; if the mofo tested positive and is suspended for 10 games AFTER arbitration procedures were exhausted; you can put it on the board (YES) that Raffy was taking PED's.

I will not accept the exlanation that he did not know what he was taking; or some 'suppplement' he took tested positive etc etc. These guys all have access to doctors and trainers who will tell them what to avoid. If they choose not to avail themselves of these, and complain later that the 'knowingly' did not take any PED's; that is just a CYA denial.

Great couple of days for Ryno, though!

by victor on Aug 1, 2005 1:45 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

An anabolic reaction can occur

from taking legal supplements that create that sort of reaction.

The media is too quick to judge and most of the sportswriters have no clue what supplements are illegal. These guys just love the controversy and love to break a story of this magnitude whether or not it is true does not matter.

"You know what God told the cubs. Don't do anything until I get back!" Pete Rose

by Will71081 on Aug 1, 2005 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Denial

Cough Cough.

I guess Sosa never used Steroids either.

by SoBlueCal on Aug 1, 2005 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow

I guess I missed Sammy's positive drug test.

As Joe Sheehan said today (and his column is free today on baseballprospectus.com) the plural of opinion is not fact.

Unless you shot up with him, you have no clue as to whether Sosa used steriods or not. And neither do I.

It's time to strangle your inner Neifi.

by Josh77 on Aug 1, 2005 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I understand

that an anabolic reaction can occur when a substance that is 'legal' enters the body. My point is that the fact that the supplement is legal is because it has not been put on the banned list yet. The laws have not caught up to the supplement industry.

That is why I think that players who are part of a drug testing program need to get ALL their supplements tested before taking them. Once they test positive, they will forever be labelled cheaters. That is why it is in their own interest to be proactive in what they put in their bodies.

Here, it is very simple. If what you consume is not part of a presciption; you lose whatever claim to innocence you have. Palmeiro should have known better than to take 'supplements' that were untested after the bad of-season baseball went through.

by victor on Aug 1, 2005 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's no coincidence...

that they announced this today, after the HOF ceremonies were finished. Otherwise it would have stolen the spotlight from the Class of '05.

I'd be very curious to see the timeline here: actual testing date vs. trip to Congress.

by bison on Aug 1, 2005 1:54 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

the reason god invented the internet

is so that everyone can mouth off about things they know very little about. read one wire story on line, and we're suddenly all qualified to condemn.

perhaps he did consult his trainer, and a mistake was made.

i have more respect for a guy who makes a mistake and apologizes than i do for someone who calls someone else a liar without a whole lot of knowledge.

such is the internet, i suppose.

by billywan on Aug 1, 2005 2:03 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Do you respect

those who go in front of Congress and perjures himself?

All I know is, if the Federal Gov't had me under a microscope, I would make DAMN sure what I put into my body was legal and wouldn't violate the steroid policy.

by SoBlueCal on Aug 1, 2005 2:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

case in point

he said before congress "i have never used steroids." at a later date he tests positive for a banned substance. may or may not have been steroids. and he says "i have never knowingly used steroids."

i'm not sure how that adds up to perjury. only if you're making up your mind first, and looking at the evidence second.

i mean, maybe you're right. but we really don't know for sure. but that's never stopped the awesome power of the internet for placing blame.

by billywan on Aug 1, 2005 2:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

A lot of our public servants

perjure themself on a daily basis. GW, Karl Rove, Bill Frist, Rick Santorum, Tom Delay, Joe Lieberman, the list goes on and on and on.
No big fuss is made about those guys.

But when the statement about Raffie's suspension or any other suspension is made. Or any suspicion that Sosa, Mcgwire, and others were using roids and not another substance that produces similar results yet was not banned like Andro. The media jumps on it and his face is in the headline of every sports web site.

These guys love to try and bring the superstars down, because if they do it makes them feel better about themselves. Jay Mariotti can now walk around saying I could've hit 66 homeruns but I didn't take steroids like Sammy Sosa. Or Bob Ryan can feel better because he could have had 3000 hits, 500+ hrs., and a career BA of about .280 if he had just taken steroids.

STEROIDS OR NO STEROIDS, THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THESE GUYS ARE AMAZING.

"You know what God told the cubs. Don't do anything until I get back!" Pete Rose

by Will71081 on Aug 1, 2005 2:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I never talk about steroids

But I think this is fantastic:

STEROIDS OR NO STEROIDS, THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THESE GUYS ARE AMAZING.

That sums everything up. We all know about what steroids do, and instantly making you a 50 HR - 120 RBI threat isn't one. If that were the case, then every hitter in the game would be a stud.

According to the Chicago Tribune: "The Oakland A's are 32-0 when they have scored more runs than their opponents.

by Carlos on Aug 1, 2005 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

No

but you have to wonder how many otherwise would be deep fly balls wind up going out of the park. Heck, I've seen Bonds get jammed and hit it off his hands out of the park. They make you stronger, period. Stronger generally means a quicker bat.

I have to say that I am suprised that people here are so dismissive of this. I'm personally pretty sickened by it. I think he's a cheater (and yes, I know about the whole Jim Miller effect, but let's face it, these stories about Raffi have been around for a while now) who respects his own accomplishments more than the game.

Hey-Dawson backwards is Noswad!---Harry Caray

by cubbiejulie on Aug 1, 2005 8:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

His accomplishments

is just the reason why it would be dumb to take anything. He just put a gray cloud over his accomplishments. When did he get his 3000 hit? I have heard that they found out about this a month ago and that he already appealed. Someone told me so it could be very wrong. So if that is true, than maybe he couldn't get 3000 hits without some help.

Cubbie blue always sPaRkLeS in my eyes.

by sparkles721 on Aug 1, 2005 8:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

steroids

most things i've read about steroids in baseball say their effect actually has less to do with strength and more to do with energy and stamina.

modern training techniques, legal supplements, the ability to train year round rather than get an offseason job - all of these have made even the non-cheaters strong.

the interesting thing is that users don't have down days. they don't suffer through the long season. they recover quicker, and are generally performing at a peak level more often.

just thought that was interesting.

but about your other point "a cheater who respects his own accomplishments more than the game," - says who? you? have you talked to him?

raffi has played in more than 150 games in all but two seasons since he became a regular. not exactly the sign of someone who's more worried about himself than the game. nor what one would expect from someone who's body should be falling apart from regular steroid use.

so your argument seems to be that since the stories have been around "for awhile now," you must be correct. interesting theory.

by billywan on Aug 1, 2005 9:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Julie

You are sickened by our dismissiveness. I am sickened by your logic. Since you have seen Barry Bonds get jammed and hit a ball out of the park that is conclusive proof that steroids help you hit HRs.

Ridiculous logic. There are many factors, first with or without steroids players are generally bigger today because of better strength training technology. Pitchers throw harder which causes the ball to go further.

There a whole lot of cheaters when the "greats" played, the difference was that the media was a not a 24 hour news media that needed shocking stories. Aaron was rumored to have used amphetamines, Ruth was rumored to have corked his bats, and god knows how many picthers threw spit balls or scuffed balls.

"You know what God told the cubs. Don't do anything until I get back!" Pete Rose

by Will71081 on Aug 2, 2005 7:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I meant

that I was sickened by his steriod use. And Spike O'Dell had a kinesiologist on his show this morning that said the same thing I did: steriod use means quicker bat speed. He also said something that I had never heard, that there is mounting evidence that some steriods also make players' sense keener, improving hand-eye coordination and their ability to pick up the ball.

I never understand why everyone jumps to these players' defense when stuff like this comes out--just like Sammy with the corked bat. It's cheating. Worse, it's illegal. Even if you don't think that it helps hit home runs, it's still cheating.

Hey-Dawson backwards is Noswad!---Harry Caray

by cubbiejulie on Aug 2, 2005 7:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Do you have this guys name?

I would love to google it to see if he is reputable or some kook that O'dell had on the show to perpetuate this controversy.

"You know what God told the cubs. Don't do anything until I get back!" Pete Rose

by Will71081 on Aug 2, 2005 8:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

One wrong doing doesn't excuse another

I don't know enough about the alleged perjury by any of the politicians you mentioned - or for that matter what substance Rafy was actually suspended for - but if he DID perjur himself then it is not made "okay" because "that guy lied too, and no-one made a big fuss about it."

If you lied, you lied. I don't care if congressmen, presidents or clergymen have lied more.

Again, we don't know exactly what Rafy was banned for, but what ever it is - he is 100% to blame for it. The man makes millions a year. He can afford the best dieticians, pharmacist, doctors, personal trainers, sex counselers, barbers and cable packages. He KNEW the rules. If he ingested a performance enhancing drug - knowingly or not - he is WRONG. He cheated.

Check-swing ground outs are still an out.

"Didn't mean to" is no excuse.

Now please excuse me while I go trade in my Viagra for Levitra.

Robb

Who's the kid in the big sombrero?

by BCurt10 on Aug 1, 2005 2:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The point about politicians

was meant to emphasize the hypocrisy of this whole ordeal. The men who tried to force a more stringent policy are mostly liars themselves and also have similar motives to these sportswriters whose goal is to make themselves feel like they are of equal talent to the players. And they too could have been great if they had taken steroids.

If you want a more thorough explanation go here or here for another very good article

"You know what God told the cubs. Don't do anything until I get back!" Pete Rose

by Will71081 on Aug 1, 2005 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, I love Irony

And I appreciate the irony of perjury and cheating being enforced by a group known for such things.

But I don't think even the ego-mad Mariotti would think that "with steroids I could have been great too." Now maybe guys like Alex Cora or Rey Sanchez could say that. But most people realize it would take more than a shot in the rump to get them to even play professional baseball.

I think the witch hunt for 'Roids users has a good base. No one wants to see the records of your child-hood idols shattered by a bunch o' cheaters.

Does Congress have more important things they should be dealing with? YES. But I don't think their interest in steroids is to make themselves feel equal to Barry Bonds.

They already get laid more than he does.

robb

Who's the kid in the big sombrero?

by BCurt10 on Aug 1, 2005 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

My comment about Mariotti

was somewhat hyperbole. If you read the legal article I linked to. I had never heard about Hank Aaron's supposed amphetamine use, Babe Ruth supposed cork use, and of course the spit ball has been around for years.

It just seems that people are always trying to bring these guys down rather than enjoy what they are doing.

"You know what God told the cubs. Don't do anything until I get back!" Pete Rose

by Will71081 on Aug 1, 2005 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Once again ...

how are these people known for perjury? Do you even know what perjury is? It's lying while under oath. It's a criminal offense.

I'm no fan of politicians as a breed. But if you're going to tar them all with the same brush by saying that perjury is a distinctive trademark of theirs, then you're essentially calling them all criminals.

Palmiero was sworn in before he gave his testimony to the congressional committee in March. He was under oath. If Congress feels that they have a perjury case against Palmiero, they can ask the Department of Justice to pursue contempt of Congress charges against him.

Again, perjury and lying are not the same thing. The first is a subset of the second. But the second isn't necessarily a crime.

Luck is the residue of design. -- Branch Rickey

by Gregory on Aug 2, 2005 9:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

He's a friend of GW

no way a Republican congress will indict a friend of this president. Although it would deflect some of the attention of Karl Rove so you never know.

"You know what God told the cubs. Don't do anything until I get back!" Pete Rose

by Will71081 on Aug 2, 2005 9:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

must. resist. taking. bait.

instead i'll just say "screw pete rose."
whew. that felt good.

by billywan on Aug 2, 2005 9:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're asking the wrong guy.

I'm not the one that said all those politicians perjur themselves all the time. I'm not taking issue w/ congress. In fact my point was that whether or not someone else lied (or committed perjury, Greg) does not make it okay if Rafy lied - which would in fact mean that he committed perjury.

If you re-read my earlier post, you'll see that I said I don't know about their alleged perjury.

You need to lighten up a bit. Start looking at the point someone is trying to make instead of splitting hairs w/ their post.

Who's the kid in the big sombrero?

by BCurt10 on Aug 2, 2005 10:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with your point, Curt

but you appeared to be backtracking from your earlier agnosticism re: politicians by saying in your second post that you "appreciated the irony" of perjuring politicians standing in judgment of others. If that's not what you actually meant, than I have no argument with you at all.

I'm not trying to split hairs. I'm just trying to follow your line of thought.

Luck is the residue of design. -- Branch Rickey

by Gregory on Aug 2, 2005 5:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

you need the facts first

Palmeiro can only be held to his words on any testing done up to that point (March '05). This test was conducted after his appearance and does not subject him to the penalty of perjury. There would have to be proof that he took steroids prior to his congressional appearance.

This is really a moot point.

by socalbob on Aug 2, 2005 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

We don't know when Palmiero took the test

The date of the test was not released to the public. It's not a moot point until that date is released.

Personally, I doubt that the test was pre-hearing. And that's why the legal battle with regard to his testimony will probably never happen, because if the test was post-hearing the evidence against him re: a contempt of Congress charge is circumstantial. It has nothing to do with George Bush or Karl Rove or a Republican Congress.

Luck is the residue of design. -- Branch Rickey

by Gregory on Aug 2, 2005 5:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Never thought of it like that...

....That Palmeiro tests' positive for Steroids and it's the media's fault??

Classic.

by SoBlueCal on Aug 1, 2005 3:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

How did those public servants

perjure themselves? Perjury means lying while under oath.

Luck is the residue of design. -- Branch Rickey

by Gregory on Aug 2, 2005 8:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

LOL

the reason god invented the internet
is so that everyone can mouth off about things they know very little about. read one wire story on line, and we're suddenly all qualified to condemn.

And don't forget the internet's cousin "talk radio."

I'm not here to make apologies for Palmeiro. I'm really upset that they won't tell us what the substance is, so that we could come to a better conclusion about it. But you're right--no one wants to see any shade of nuance or doubt in anything--and it's worse outside of sports.

I do think it's pretty damn unlikely that he just started using this substance this season after his congressional testimony. And he should have come clean then about what he did use--even if it wasn't a "steriod" per se. So I'm going to hold that against him--especially since he made himself out to be such a paragon of virtue in those hearings.

It's time to strangle your inner Neifi.

by Josh77 on Aug 1, 2005 3:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think he just started using

I think his masking agent didn't work.

Hey-Dawson backwards is Noswad!---Harry Caray

by cubbiejulie on Aug 1, 2005 8:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Al Gore is God?

;-)

Luck is the residue of design. -- Branch Rickey

by Gregory on Aug 2, 2005 8:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i put that one on a tee for you...

by billywan on Aug 2, 2005 9:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, you did

... and a satisfying swing it was. Thanks!

Luck is the residue of design. -- Branch Rickey

by Gregory on Aug 2, 2005 5:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jose Canseco

Like him or not, but his "credibility" just went up.

Also, let's not forget that by his actions of writing that book, agreed or not, has accelerated the process of excursing steroids from the game of Baseball.

He might even be looked on in 20 years, ironically, as a "heroic figure", one in which saved the game of baseball??

by SoBlueCal on Aug 1, 2005 2:05 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

i'm pretty sure that in 20 years

canseco's only claim to fame will be having that home run bounce off his head.

by billywan on Aug 1, 2005 2:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Didn't he date Madonna?

So he's got that going for him...

... which is nice.

Who's the kid in the big sombrero?

by BCurt10 on Aug 1, 2005 3:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Speaking of classic...

LOL....Yeah you're right, how could I forget that?

by SoBlueCal on Aug 1, 2005 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Strange and Sad

I am not going to jump on either the "Free Raffy" or "Fry Raffy" bandwagons. It is more than that. This is about the game. At the beginning of the season the steroids issue so dominated the news that many predicted a small exodus of baseball fans. It was easy to hate a Giambi because he is a Yankee or a Barry Bonds because he's, well, Barry Bonds, or even a Sammy Sosa. But then the steroid talk subsided, and a very good season of baseball commenced. Andthen Raffy comes along, who is relatively likeable, and who has accomplished so much. The simple fact that he got No. 3000 only a couple of weeks ago makes this one of the more absurd offences committed in some time.

I don't know what he did, but even if he appeals (which it doesn't look like he is going to do), and wins that appeal, the tarnish is once again back on the game. There are so many good things about baseball, so many players we can look up to (a couple at Cooperstown yesterday), and the fact that the cliched "rotten apples" have taken over is just sad.

It is so hard to stay positive and hopeful when even the hint of wrongdoing by one of baseball's best players tarnishes our love and respect for the game.

by brokenland on Aug 1, 2005 3:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Yup

and I was disappointed. I'm sure a lot of people saw that his team came out and congratulated him, and with all that and his 3000th is pretty sad. Especially since so many people have said he has worked for it and not used anything to help himself.

The only thing that gets me in his statement(I immediately went to see the White Sox game and decided to listen)is that he didn't do it intentionally. He should have been a lot more careful. Not intentionally. But he did it, intentional or unintentional, and he isn't denying it. I'm glad I'm not an O's fan because if I'm disappointed, I can't imagine what the fans in Baltimore feel.

Cubbie blue always sPaRkLeS in my eyes.

by sparkles721 on Aug 1, 2005 3:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Guilty or not

I just think it's funny that when Palmeiro says that he never knowingly took any steroids, there are so many that are willing to accept that and say that they aren't going to judge him and the like. However, when Bonds said exactly the same thing, hardly anyone believed that it was possible.

The Dumbass

by Scott on Aug 1, 2005 5:30 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

just for the record

i've said the same thing about bonds as i do about raffy. bonds says "i didn't know they were steroids." i have no reason to not believe him.

now i'm not saying it doesn't taint his records - it does. and i'm not saying he shouldn't have looked a little harder at what he was taking - he should have.

i'm just saying we shouldn't be accusing people of things we have no way of backing up.

by billywan on Aug 1, 2005 5:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Can anyone tell me who leads the AL

in OPS and RC/27 outs?

Yep, that's right. The Giambino! Now clean (off the juice) and healthy (parasite and tumor) he is having a monster season. The hard work he did is paying off.

It just shows that roids aren't the reason for performance. Hitting a baseball is still the hardest individual athletic thing to do. Hit a round ball with a round bat square.

I hope Palmeiro's career is not tarnished or questioned. His character and integrity can be questioned given the light of this circumstance. I just wish we knew the facts around this suspension instead of speculating.

by socalbob on Aug 1, 2005 5:43 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs